femedtech Open Space #femedtech

Reblogged from https://oer19.oerconf.org/news/guest-blog-femedtech-open-space-by-lorna-campbell-and-frances-bell/

#femedtech banner
#femedtech banner

By Lorna M. Campbell, @lornamcampbell, and Frances Bell, @francesbell

One of the real strengths of the OER Conferences is that in recent years they have increasingly facilitated an ongoing critical discourse that seeks to question and renegotiate what openness means to educators, teachers and learners within different contexts and perspectives.  This discourse ripples out from the physical and temporal boundaries of the conferences in the form of blogs posts, twitter conversations, research papers and discussions that enable us to trace the evolution of narratives of open from year to year. OER17 The Politics of Open explored the challenges current political movements posed for Open Education and how they might further or hinder values of , sharing, connectedness, equity, voice, agency, and openness. OER18 Open For All sparked discussions around power and marginality, inclusivity, diversity, identity, decolonisation and respect, and these themes will be explored further during OER19.  When Co-Chair Catherine Cronin introduced the themes of OER19 Recentering Open: Critical and Global Perspectives at the end of OER18 in Bristol she stressed the imperative of moving beyond hero narratives and including marginalised voices.

These themes and values align strongly with those of femedtech, an open, inclusive and voluntary network of education technology practitioners informed by feminist principles.  Femedtech is committed to creating inclusive online spaces where marginalised voices can speak and be heard. We acknowledge that this is an ongoing work in progress and a learning experience for all of us.

With this in mind, the femedtech network will be facilitating an inclusive Open Space session around OER19 to explore themes and conversations that have emerged from previous OER conferences around power, marginality, equality, diversity and inclusion.  We’ll be seeking to question dominant narratives of “open”, explore whose voices are included and whose are excluded from our open spaces and open practices, whose voices we choose to amplify and whose are silenced.

Questions we hope to consider before, during and after the OER19 session include;

  • How do we balance privacy, openness and personal ethics?
  • How do we mediate our place in the open community, aspects of which might conflict with our personal ethics?
  • Is openness an act of conformance and / or defiance? And are there performative aspects to openness?
  • Do we feel pressured to be more open than we are comfortable with, or do our boundaries constrain us?
  • How do we manage sustainable spaces for exploring challenging issues around open?

In order to facilitate these discussions and to ensure the widest participation from the community, we are building an online femedtech Open Space, http://femedtech.net/, to gather stories, thoughts, reflections, responses and reactions, in the form of written content, images, audio, and media.  We welcome reflections on all aspects and experiences of openness from feminist perspectives and we encourage participants to raise their own questions and tell their own stories.  We acknowledge that our understanding of openness is highly personal and contextualised, and appreciate that there is no standard definition of openness to which we must comply. In order to ensure that engaging with the #femedtech Open Space will be as widely accessible and inclusive as possible, participants are able to contribute to these conversations anonymously if they choose.

Through the femedtech Open Space, we also aim to explore how we build our communities and practices here and elsewhere in the #femedtech network, and evaluate whether this is a sustainable model for growing the #femedtech community and network. Inspired by Dignazio & Klein (2018), we will develop our inclusive values statement iteratively in conjunction with activities on the Open Space and across the femedtech community.

During the conference session, we will briefly introduce the Open Space for those who haven’t seen it before, and invite delegates and virtual participants to contribute and discuss their own ideas and reflections. We’ll summarise progress to date, invite feedback from session participants, outline future plans, and encourage participants to engage with others’ contributions after the conference. We also hope to encourage remote participation in the conference session.

We invite you to visit the femedtech Open Space to contribute your thoughts, reflections, comments, stories and ideas:
http://femedtech.net/

Acknowledgements

This is an extra-institutional project taking place within the broad venture of the femedtech network.

The femedtech Open Space is generously hosted by Reclaim Hosting.  Reclaim Hosting provides educators and institutions with an easy way to offer their students domains and web hosting that they own and control.   The site uses the open source TRU Writer SPLOT WordPress theme developed by Alan Levine and available on Github.

Our Code of Conduct is adapted with permission from  PressED Conference run by Natalie Lafferty and Pat Lockley. It incorporates elements from ukmedchat and FOAMed and is intended to be interpreted according to feminist principles.

What can we do at #Femedtech to celebrate International Women’s Day? #IWD2019 #OEWEEK

via GIPHY

Several months ago, I volunteered for Femedtech curation for these 2 weeks because I wanted to think about how we might mark International Women’s Day at Femedtech. As it happens, Javiera Atenas contacted me a few weeks ago about a possible event during Open Education Week and on International Women’s Day.

I’m pleased to share that the Association for Learning Technology, The Open Education Working Group (from Open Knowledge International) and Femedtech bring you

Women in the Open: Experiences, perspectives and approaches <details>, a webinar co-hosted by Javiera Atenas, Frances Bell and Caroline Kuhn. We are lining up some great speakers that we will soon share with you.

I have already shared some ideas of what femedtech has done in the past, and thanked our wonderful curators.  Now I am hoping to get some ideas from #femedtech in the first week of my curation. How do you plan to celebrate International Women’s Day and Open Education Week?

Please let us know at #Femedtech and/or in the comments below what your plans are, and keep us posted of any events you attend.

Crafting as a networking and wellbeing activity for #Femedtech

Femedtechdata

I am pretty passionate about the network that currently appears as a Twitter hashtag #femedtech, and as a Twitter account @femedtech that has existed as shared curation space since April 2018. We have a different curator every 2 weeks, each of whom brings their own perspective and practices, growing our network (as you can see in the chart), and enhancing the experience of followers and participants. If you would like to be a curator in 2019, visit our curation space, and add your name and Twitter handle at a fortnight of your choice. Femedtech is definitely for the many not the few 🙂

This post has been brewing for some time, and is posted now to fit in with the activities planned by our curator for this fortnight, the inimitable Viv Rolfe. Like other curators, Viv has her own ideas about curation and as you can see her overall theme is #Wellbeing.


Viv hasn’t forgotten about craft and its role in wellbeing. I love crafting, mainly knitting, sewing and quilting, for many reasons. Crafting has taught me about learning and community but most of all it relaxes me. The relaxation becomes visible as the tension of the stitches improves the longer you knit. In my current learning project, free motion quilting, I need to give the craft my full attention, and because I’m learning, my shoulders begin to ache and I give up after an hour. I derive enormous satisfaction from the visible improvement in my work, and I’m curious to know if I can become a relaxed free motion quilter in time.

Back in September, Maren posted this tweet

The patterns

I spent some time thinking about this and I’d like to offer you the results of my research and some initial designs.

Patterns Spreadsheet

I’d love some of you to try these out and improve them/ make them into actual crafted items and/or patterns.

So what could you do with them?

Fair Isle knitters could knit them up in two colours to create a mug warmer, a scarf, a hat or whatever you want. What’s possible depends on the weight of yarn you choose?

So for example, you’d probably need to choose a fine yarn for a mug warmer (to get enough stitches for the pattern), and if you wanted to use chunky yarn, you’d need to create something bigger like a hat.

Fair Isle is not the easiest technique but there is an easier alternative called Swiss Darning, or Duplicate stitch that I have used in the pattern below.  If you like doing cross stitch,  you could use linen or Binca/Aida for the fabric and embroidery floss/ cotton perle for the thread.

You might have different ideas – please share!

Pattern for Simple Stocking Stitch Headband

I have based this pattern on another that is also available at Ravelry, along with another 1578 free patterns for headbands.

I suggest that you knit this as Stocking Stitch – knit a row, purl a row (rather than in the round on a circular needle) so that you can adjust the size by overlapping when you see how it turns out. It’s also easier to do the Duplicate Stitch on a flat piece of knitting.  Because there will be 80 stitches in each row, you should choose either the first or the third pattern in the diagram above. This pattern uses the third pattern in my Patterns Spreadsheet.

Materials

You should buy one ball of double knitting, Aran or chunky yarn in the background colour and find/ beg some scraps in a contrast colour, in the same yarn weight or heavier as the contrast has to cover the background stitch. So double knitting for background and chunky or Aran for lettering would be a good combo. Look in the oddments box in the knitting shop, or find a charity shop that sells odd balls of yarn and needles.

Ball bands often give you an idea of which needles to use and what size the yarn knits up to. This one said it takes 22 stitches to get 10 cm using 4 mm needles. So 80 stitches would give me (80 x 10)/22 =36.4 cm. When I measured my head, I realised that would be too small so I used bigger needles: 5mm for the main knitting, and 5.5mm for casting on and off to avoid a tight edge. My head is quite big (quiet there at the back) so I’m hoping that the pattern works for you.

Of course, these calculations also depend on how tightly or loosely you knit so there’s a bit of guesswork involved. If it’s too small when you’ve finished, there are fixes available, just ask.

I have put links to searches/videos in the pattern but for beginners, I recommend finding a friendly more experienced knitter who will help you get started and recover from those inevitable mistakes. Learn to love the mistakes. You will also need a blunt sewing up needle like this.

Knitting the headband/earwarmer

Cast on 80 stitches using main/background yarn, and 5.5 or 6 mm needle.

Switch to 5 mm needles.

Garter Stitch Ridge

Rows 1 and 2 : Knit 80 stitches.

This will give you the ridge you see in the photo below. If you want a bigger ridge, feel free to do an extra 2 knit rows, but remember to do matching extra rows at the end.

Stocking Stitch Background

Row 3: Knit 80 stitches

Row 4: Purl 80 stitches

Repeat (Rows 3,4) 5 times.

This will give 12 rows of stocking stitch, enough for 8 rows of pattern (later), with 2 unpatterned rows top and bottom.

Garter Stitch Ridge

Rows 15 and 16 : Knit 80 stitches.

Remember to add extra knit rows now if you added them at the beginning.

Cast off with 5.5 or 6 mm needle.

Adding the lettering using Duplicate Stitch

Duplicate stitch is just that – sewing a contrast yarn over selected stitches to make a pattern. In this case, the pattern spells out #femedtech, and you can see from the photo that I started more or less in the middle of the third pattern in the download.

I knitted this and made a start on the duplicate stitching last night and will post an update when it’s ready to be worn.

Here are some clear instructions with photos, or you may prefer to watch a video.

Reflecting before #ALTC : Rear view mirror and forward vision

Objects in Mirror are closer than they appear by Aniket Thakur CC BY 2.0

In preparation for our interactive presentation at ALTC 2018 A personal, feminist and critical retrospective of Learning (and) Technology, 1994-2018, Catherine Cronin and I are sharing blog posts of our personal and feminist histories in education and technology that are sometimes coincident with each other and with the history of ALTC. Here is Catherine’s post.

I first became aware of feminism as a movement in the 1960s and began to think more deeply about it in the early 1970s when I read The Female Eunuch by Germaine Greer.  This and other reading provoked a lot of thinking about my upbringing as one of four children with three older brothers and a secondary education in an all-girls grammar school where subjects like Maths and Science were less popular but still seen as doable by girls. My first experience of feminist thought came much earlier as I remember reacting to a nursery rhyme that contained the line

“My face is my fortune, sir,” she said.

Well, that made me sit up – I didn’t like the idea of my face being my fortune, as the young me thought I had a lot more to offer. I reflected on this a few years ago, and reflection has been a friend to me in my teaching and learning over many years.

On my Mathematics degree at University of Manchester in the early 1970s, there were approximately 10% women, 90% men and I was struck by the variable quality of lectures and reliance on PhD students for small group teaching. This experience influenced my educational/ learning philosophy in my practice in industry and in education, as teacher and learner.

I was lucky to be graduating and seeking employment after Equal Pay legislation but the mid-70s job market was slow. Finding employment as a COBOL programmer/analyst with the Ministry of Defence in Liverpool where we lived was a relief. Strange to say, I learned a lot in my COBOL programming experiences about learning by doing, and learning where to find rather than memorise detailed information. A 48 hour turnaround for card punching and programme compilation concentrated the mind on precision of syntax and logic. A missing full stop could cost you 2 working days. Computer memory was a real limit and minimising programme size was a matter of necessity and personal pride. My boss was a woman and I suspect that protected me somewhat from the experience of being in a tiny minority of women in a 1970s Computing work culture.

My next job was with Lancashire County Council, where presenteeism and long hours culture in Computing was the order of the day. Tired of working late to complete unrealistic deadlines, I asked to code an urgent programme amendment over a weekend at home. My time sheet entry was reduced to one third of my honest report of work done away from the office. Though I had some great male colleagues, sexism was present too. I realised shortly after I arrived that women wearing trousers was frowned on. I was good at my job but it seemed incompatible with the family life we planned so I took a PG Cert in Education at University of Liverpool.

This period of study and teaching practice gave me the opportunity to explore a range of theories and start to develop an educational philosophy that has evolved through my teaching and learning in different settings and sectors. What I learned from reading and applying ideas from authors like John Holt about how we learn and why some ‘fail’ fostered my interest in Active Learning that I first applied teaching Maths in a mixed sex secondary school and subsequently developed teaching Computing in FE, learning in my own postgraduate study and teaching IT and Information Systems (IS) in HE for 25 years. I also applied a coding technique that I encountered on the PGCE, and was surprised to find that I was more likely to take answers from boys than girls, reflecting on my own actions and school cultures.

As John Holt showed us from the 1960s, and is still relevant today, learning an algorithm is not the same as achieving deep understanding. Being a full-time mother to three children and observing babies and young children learn taught me a lot about the social and cultural aspects of learning.

Alongside my career break, I taught part-time then full-time in FE Colleges in Hertfordshire in the 1980s, even managing a network of BBC computers as part of my job description.  I took the opportunity of a move back North to study MSc IT. Stimulated by my Masters project on Classifier Systems, I began to explore the possibilities and limits of Machine Learning. Though teaching in a Computer Science department, I became convinced of the importance of human and organisational factors, influenced by my experiences as programmer and analyst, resisting technological determinism before I knew the term existed.

My journey in the 1990s brought me to the discipline that suited me, IS, that has evolved from technical systems that automated repetitive tasks, to technologically- realised social systems within and beyond organisations. I found space and colleagues to help me develop ideas and capabilities in Research and Teaching.

Research:

I started doing research before I arrived at Salford but realised that Salford offered more support and opportunities than previous institutions. I registered for a part-time PhD but, not unusually, struggled to combine the study with family life and a full-time job. Reduced workload was only available in return for publlications and projects which became my focus as a strategy to obtain more time. My publications and project participation grew in the 1990s and into the 2000s, starting with internally funded projects and conference papers in the late 90s and journal papers and book chapters in the 2000s. Funded projects, notably VMART EC IST project 2000-2003, MINERVA – Collaboration across borders 2003-2005, ESRC ICT, the digital divide and habitus in the self-management of heart conditions 2005-2007, ESF Know and Network (KAN) 2007.

The strategy proved useful when I abandoned my PhD (after family health issues), leaving me with more tangible outputs than an unfinished thesis.

Teaching

The 1990s was an exciting time in IS teaching as the Internet extended the scope of IS, prompting us to develop curricula that required additional input of ideas from sociology, media studies, philosophy and other fields, as issues of ethics, gender and power appeared in our curriculum. In 1996, I found that I could practice Open (OER) by Accident influencing my teaching and subsequent research in education and learning technology. For many educators, technology was a route into Open Education but for me technology was an opportunity on my path through from active learning prior to Internet technology to new visions of education. Others were also looking back with Vygotsky’s socio-cultural approach enjoying a renaissance in the Internet era.  Other influences for me were Lave & Wenger’s Community of Practice, Constructivism, the work of CSALT at Lancaster (eg this JISC-funded project) and research into community and other informal learning approaches. In 1998, reading Digital Diploma Mills by David Noble was an object lesson in a critical approach to educational technology, alerting me to its possible use in casualisation and labour exploitation in HE.  Currently Hack Education by Audrey Watters is my go to critical space.

ALT and me and you

The Association for Learning Technology was founded in 1993 as a professional association and learned society. Learning technology hadn’t started in the 1990s, as Tony Bates short history shows us, but the arrival of the Internet and World Wide Web as mainstream in Higher Education in the 1990s influenced those of us who could create web pages to be producers as well as consumers. I firat encountered ALT through reading its journal ALT-J in the late 1990s, and I think that the first ALT-C that I attended was in Edinburgh in 2001, thereafter attending in 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009 (where I gave a welcome on crutches after breaking my leg in Iceland :), 2011 where I was part of a fun and critical symposium , 2017 where I looked at resistance. ALT has been a great part of my learning technology story and I hope that I have given back through being co-editor of Research in Learning Technology (bringing an IS perspective), reviewing, authoring, contributing to programme and research committees.

I am so looking forward to the next stage of our work, where Catherine and I can continue to draw out the threads that emerge from our reflections (and those who participate in person and online in our ALT-C session) and trace them through the emergent themes from 25 years of ALT-C. As Catherine said, the personal is political, and history matters. Let’s learn from the history of ALT and make the next 25 years matter.  Can’t wait to hear from you all – sooner or later.

References

Holt, J. (1969). How children fail. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

 

Femedtech – you are invited to a work in progress

Femedtech 18 May 2018

In early 20187, building on connections, in some cases friendship, and ideas, a group of women practicing and researching in educational technology launched femedtech – a feminist network for people working in education. It appeared via a Twitter account @femedtech, a hashtag #femedtech and a (now defunct website femedte.ch powered by WordPress) and was very much a volunteer effort. Our early vision for femedte.ch as a conversational space where people operated under their own identities within conversation proved difficult to achieve. Women (and most of our supporters were women) in educational technology, have many goals and challenges, and networking has to be done in the interstices of the daily struggle to do the work, look for the job and be the person who is and who looks after others.
This quote from the recent book created by many staff and students from Edinburgh University (and a few from elsewhere) captures gender inequality present in UK higher education.

The ivory tower, like other stately homes in the UK, might present a grand façade to the world but closer inspection reveals a dark, spidery basement full of inequalities. Men from disadvantaged social backgrounds might never make it to the ivory tower in the first place, and men who do get there are less likely to do well. Women students are more likely than men to suffer from mental health problems and encounter sexual harassment during their university lives, and even as graduates will earn less pay for the work they do during the course of their careers. Women staff are less likely to have permanent contracts, and considerably fewer of them ascend the career staircase of the ivory tower to professorial or senior management levels. Those who do make it there are paid less than men. The occupants of the ivory tower no longer sip port and think deep thoughts. Instead they drink Red Bull and fill in spreadsheets. They work long hours under stress to serve conflicting, crushing governmental agendas of excellence.

Femedtech has persisted in a quiet way on Twitter, and encouraged by support from people like Maren Deepwell, @femedtech and #femedtech have begun to grow by sharing the task of curating them for a two week slot.  So why don’t you check out femedtech on Twitter, and think about whether you would like join in by reading, tweeting, re-tweeting or curating?

Here’s how Maren found the experience of curation.  You can find out more details and sign up here.

Robertson, J., Williams, A., Jones, D., Isbel, L., & Loads, D. (2018). EqualBITE: Gender equality in higher education. Rotterdam, Boston Taipei: Sense Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/3373-equalbite.pdf

A balanced complaint

I caught part of a BBC2 documentary, Trump’s America a Newsnight Special, last night and was appalled by what I saw.

From my armchair I tweeted, and it seems a few people saw my tweets but they didn’t seem to make much of a difference except that I probably felt a bit better for having tweeted, as part of the general head-shaking in this post-election period. Tweeting was marginally better than laughing at Have I Got News for you? but still pretty passive.

Frances Bell's tweets about Newsnight documentary
Frances Bell’s tweets about Newsnight documentary

Today I plan to watch the whole documentary on iPlayer (sorry that won’t be available to all of you). Then this morning on Facebook, I noticed that George Roberts was making a complaint to the BBC about an item on the Today radio programme.

As a tiny step towards action, I compiled my first ever complaint to the BBC, and I have included the text of it below the video.


“Last night I watched the segment of the Newsnight Documentary where Emily Maitlis interviewed Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and the editor in chief of the American Spectator, R Emmett Tyrrell. Emily did her best to raise the issue of Donald Trump’s racism with both interviewees. Chimamanda was articulate and addressed the points that Emily raised but Emmett Tyrrell was an embarrassment to watch. He rambled, tried to compare KKK with the Knights of St Columba to justify why we need not be concerned about Trump being supported by them, rejected Chimamanda’s valid point on why oppressed people may vote for oppressors. He clearly forgot, or couldn’t cope with the strangeness to him of, Chimamanda’s name at one point. He rejected what he interpreted as Chimamanda’s use of false consciousness as ‘Marxist’ and completely failed to address what she said about his inability to define racism.
My complaint is about the decision to include Emmett Tyrrell in this segment. Was it for reasons of ‘balance’? Surely you could have found a Trump supporter capable of reasoned argument. Even if no such person exists, you could have found someone who didn’t necessarily agree with her to listen and respond to Chimamanda. How fortunate you were to have her on the show, and her contribution was diminished by the presence of someone unsuited to documentary debate.
Please could you tell me:
why Tyrell was invited?
Is there a policy in place that requires balance at the expense of the quality of the exploration of issue?
What role does an interviewer play in choice of interviewees? ”

Whilst I was compiling my complaint, I saw that someone had posted a youtube video of the subject of my complaint which allows me to share it with those who can’t get iplayer. I contributed to the Facebook thread with this comment

My Facebook Comment
My Facebook Comment

I won’t reproduce the conversation from the semi-private space of Facebook but happy for others involved to comment here. I mentioned my guess about a white male as that was relevant to the original post. One response to me was strange. Whilst decrying people looking everywhere for someone to blame for the Trump, he appeared (in his response to  me a white woman) to blame the demographic of white women for Clinton not being elected.  What I have learned from painful reflection on my own white privilege has strengthened my feminism.

So here is what I think:

Any black or brown person who reads this post is perfectly entitled to ignore or mock my thoughts and actions. They can, but don’t have to, point out any inevitable misconceptions that stem from my white privilege because it isn’t their responsibility to educate me – I have to do that for myself. Black and brown Americans have every right to be angry about the way others voted, the Democrats for failing to deliver and the (in)actions of others, not least because it is the black and brown people who will most affected by this electoral result.

But what I learned from watching Chimamanda when she told Emmett Tyrell that he had no right to define racism, is that I don’t have to take being told by a white man that the demographic of white women prevented Hillary Clinton being elected. Because a white man being angry at white women for this is sexist.  I don’t feel anger at his comments – I’m grateful that he helped to improve my complaint, and my resolve to learn and take action (that goes beyond social media).

I will let you know of any outcome of the complaint in the comments, so subscribe to the post if you are interested. This is a tiny piece of activity but one thing that my network has shown me this week is that we need to work together and support others, particularly those who are disproportionately damaged by an outcome they voted against.

Acknowledgements
Thanks to something George Roberts said on Facebook about another BBC programme, I actually got my act together to make a formal complaint. Check out the page if you feel moved to complain about BBC programmes in future.

Language, Politics and #OER17

1984, Politics and the English Language, vintage Orwell reissues from Random Penguin, Foyles, St Pancras, Camden, London, UK
Vintage Orwell

This blog post started life as a comment on Martin Weller’s post about language and how it affects behaviour and thoughts in Edtech. The comment mysteriously disappeared as I posted it so I thought that I would repost it here and link from Martin’s post. The title of the post “Let’s think inside the box“ made me think about Blackboxing .
Whilst I agreed with many of the ideas in the post, Martin’s statement “But this post isn’t about politics” stopped me short.  I wondered what those of us thinking of making a submission to OER17  would make of this. I have been puzzling for a few weeks about what politics can mean in the context of  “The Politics of Open” theme for OER17, and I guess that others may be doing so too. I think that the concept of politics being broad and interpreted in different contexts will make for a great conference that enriches our understanding of Open Educational Practices and Resources.
So I would like to encourage Martin to think about how his post could be about politics and ‘fit’  OER17 – maybe even rework it as a submission 🙂 I was grateful to him for getting me to think about politics and language and my Scholar Google search turned up 2 corking resources.

  1. Orwell, G., 2005. Politics and the English Language. English, (December 1945), pp.1–9. Available at: https://www.homeworkmarket.com/sites/default/files/qx/15/05/19/04/politics_and_the_english_language_orwell.pdf
  2. Chomsky, N., 1984. Politics and Language. In Language and Politics. Available at: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1lCwP-RNExkC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=471&f=false (search for 471)

My subject discipline was Information Systems (that bears some parallels to Edtech) and in our teaching, we included social and organisational aspects as well the technological ones. Ethics, gender and power were definitely on the curriculum. When we think about education and/or technology without considering the politics – global, national, organisational, personal, interpersonal – we are filtering our understanding and it’s no wonder that our noble aspirations don’t always work out as we would hope. This is why I think the OER17 theme is so exciting – it can help us expand our thinking and our practice.

So it’s back to writing my submission.

It depends – Contexts for copyright, patents and licensing #OER17

Patent Suction - Image taken from page 119 of 'Beeton's Christmas Annual, British Library
Patent Suction – Image taken from page 119 of ‘Beeton’s Christmas Annual, British Library

Reading posts on variations of Creative Commons licensing by Alan Levine, Doug Belshaw ,  and  Maha Bali really made me think about our practices of licensing, copyrighting and attributing creative works, particularly of what we share as ‘knowledge’. Alan describes the various CC licenses he has used for his photos on Flickr, and the trials and tribulations he encounters in trying to apply CC0 to all of his images on Flickr. I had to check what CC0 was:

Once the creator or a subsequent owner of a work applies CC0 to a work, the work is no longer his or hers in any meaningful sense under copyright law. Anyone can then use the work in any way and for any purpose, including commercial purposes, subject to other laws and the rights others may have in the work or how the work is used. Think of CC0 as the “no rights reserved” option.Creative Commons FAQ

Doug Belshaw explains why he has applied CC0 to all of his work (including his doctoral thesis) that is under his control. Maha Bali, whilst acknowledging that CC licenses can be ignored, reveals how her approach to licence choice is contextual.

Thinking about my own practice, I publish this blog as CC BY-NC  and try to publish my research writing in Open Access journals. Having said that, the last two articles I wrote with colleagues as I was retiring were published in closed journals, since those were the most beneficial for my co-authors still subject, unlike myself, to the Research Excellence Framework. So my approach to copyright and licensing is also contextual. If asked do you publish openly? my answer would have to be – Yes, but it depends.

I am always interested in looking at historical accounts to try to understand innovation. Bijker(1995) was one of my teaching resources, with the story of the emergence of the popular style of the bicycle being a good classroom story to explore. Audrey Watters has argued powerfully that 21st Century ‘innovators’ in Educational Technology ignore/distort history in an attempt to big up their products and services.

Then I remembered reading about 19th century industrial innovations that relied on sharing rather than protection and secrecy. In looking for this, I didn’t find my original reading but instead found a very interesting article about the Cornish Pumping Engine (Nuvolari 2004). Nuvolari contrasts the ‘heroic narrative’ where individuals are credited with inventions with ‘collective invention’, an incremental approach where the contributions of individuals can remain anonymous.  For example, we all ‘know’ that James Watt invented the ‘modern’ steam engine  that helped to bring about the Industrial Revolution. Nuvolari’s case study examines what happened in Cornwall, a remote area of England, in the 19th century mining industry which had memories of a bad experience in the last quarter of the 18th century with the more fuel-efficient patented Watt steam engines, needed to address flooding in their mines. The business model that Boulton & Watt established with Cornish mine adventurers was royalties based on hypothetical fuel efficencies of the Watt engine as compared with the earlier Newcomen engine. This model was unsatisfactory to the mine adventurers not only for business and economic reasons but also because Boulton and Watt’s refusal to license the design prevented Cornish engineers from improving the engines to suit local circumstances. Watt’s patent hampered engine innovation in Cornwall (and elsewhere) and the 19th century started with a dearth of progress.

This situation lasted until 1811, when a group of mine “captains” (mine managers) decided to begin the publication of a monthly journal reporting the salient technical characteristics, the operating procedures and the performance of each engine. The explicit intention was twofold. First the publication would permit the rapid individuation and diffusion of best-practice techniques.
Secondly, it would create a climate of competition among the engineers entrusted with the different pumping engines, with favourable effects on the rate of technical progress.

Lean’s Engine Reporter continued until 1904 and was accompanied by a steady improvement in the thermodynamic efficency of Cornish engines. Cornish adventurers were driven by pragmatism rather than an ideological attachment to open knowledge. I can recommend reading Nuvolari’s case study as it questions the standard historical account of the ‘golden boys’ role in the Industrial Revolution and the role of patents in stimulating innovation, and draws attention instead to innovation’s incremental, anonymous reality that occurred in a variety of social, geographical, legal and economic circumstances.

 Monument to Boulton, Watt and Murdoch Outside the Birmingham House of Sport (formerly the Register Office) on Broad Street stands the statue of Boulton, Watt and Murdoch, nicknamed 'The Golden Boys' or 'The Carpet Salesmen'. It is the work of William Bloye, formerly head of sculpture at Birmingham School of Art and was unveiled in 1956, although preliminary designs were drawn up in 1938. The three men pioneered the industrial revolution in late 18th century England. James Watt's improvements to the steam engine and William Murdoch's invention of gas lighting have made them famous throughout the world. Matthew Boulton, entrepreneur and industrialist, harnessed their talents in a company that made everything from tableware and copper coinage to steam engines.
Fathers of Technology – monument to Boulton, Watt and Murdoch by Francesco Falciani CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Nuvolari also hints at the central nature of patents with frequency increasing with proximity to the Patents Office.

So what have I learned?

I have already started to think about the personal is political in relation to Open Educational Practice, and have long observed (from my gendered lens) restricted narratives and dialogues even within open educational communities , see this post from 2011. Cornish mine adventurers had pragmatic reasons for challenging patents and promoting competition between engineers, and will no doubt have operated within class structures. If we want to promote Open Education that challenges structural inequalities of class, gender and race, we need to acknowledge these inequalities and be alert to where heroic narratives obscure structure inequalities in the cause of ‘innovation’ and profit.

References

Bijker, W. (1995) Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change, Inside Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, MIT Press, [online] Available from: http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5110/bijker.pdf.

Nuvolari, A. (2004) ‘Collective invention during the British Industrial Revolution: the case of the Cornish pumping engine’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 28(3), pp. 347–363, [online] Available from: http://cms.tm.tue.nl/Ecis/Files/papers/wp2004/eciswp103.pdf  .

Watters, A. (2015) ‘The Invented History of “The Factory Model of Education”’, EducationFuturism.com, [online] Available from: https://educationfuturism.com/the-invented-history-of-the-factory-model-of-education-a069ae3d1e99#.9jht3gp0c (Accessed 19 October 2016).

Personal is Political – a frame for thinking about Open Educational Practice

The OER17 Call for Contributions is about to be released but we already know something the theme of the 2017 conference, entitled The Politics of Open, chaired by Josie Fraser and Alek Tarkowski. OER16 was my first OER conference and I loved its friendly atmosphere, and of course I learned a lot too.  The theme and chairs of OER17 were announced at the end of OER16, and I was thrilled at the boldness of the topic.  From what I know of the OER community, we will rise to the challenge.

I have been thinking for some time about the topic of my own submission to OER17, and in preparation for writing it, I started to think of the different flavours of ‘political’ that are important to Open Educational Practice (a concept explored so well by Catherine Cronin, in her 2016 keynote).  The theme of the conference is broad enough to welcome many different perspectives in policy, organisational and societal contexts, and is sure to include fun too.

My first thought was about openness in politics, and I found http://openpolitics.org.uk/ , and from there to http://www.rebootdemocracy.org/ . I wonder if there will be submissions  that are specifically about political systems but it’s not really where I think I can best contribute.  The conference themes include policy and practice in local and wider contexts, organisational politics, and issues of equality  and participation.  I think my contribution will look at digital literacies but I am starting by looking at how I can frame my thinking.

I am interested in approaches to openness that are contextual, and don’t expect openness to automatically remove existing structural inequalities. For the Networked Learning Conference this year, my contribution to a symposium with Catherine Cronin and Laura Gogia included this digital story that hopefully illustrates my approach.

A Door Half Closed from Frances Bell on Vimeo.

As I develop my abstract for OER17, my challenge is to present my ideas in a meaningful way for the audience (assuming it gets accepted). The phrase ‘the personal is political’ popped into my mind and I decided to refresh my memory of what it meant.  Carol Hanish wrote an article originally published in 1970 in Notes from the Second Year: Women’s  Liberation. Carol’s article was  renamed by the book editors as “The Personal Is Political”, and it has had widespread traction over the last 46 years. Reflecting in 2006, Carol said

It challenged the old anti-woman line that used spiritual, psychological, metaphysical, and pseudo-historical explanations for women’s oppression with a real, materialist analysis for why women do what we do. ” from 2006 Introduction

A materialist analysis of Open Educational Practice seems important to me, revealing lived experiences and informing possible collective responses,  beyond an idea that the political is personal. I am still homing in on my specific topic for my abstract but I feel sure that the feminist perspective of ‘the personal is political’ can help me explore the politics of Open Educational Practice.

I’d love any feedback or discussion of this.

References

Hanisch, C. (2006, original article 1970) ‘The Personal Is Political’, Carol Hanish.org, (January), pp. 1–5, [online] Available from: http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PersonalisPol.pdf.

Check out:

Twitter – conference hashtag #OER17, Chairs @josiefraser, @atarkowski , Conference Committee list https://twitter.com/josiefraser/lists/team-oer17

Web site https://oer17.oerconf.org/

Women making social media work for good causes

20141120_130041
On International Women’s Day I would like to highlight the work of three women doing good with the help of social media and those who participate.

Kate Granger is a witty and engaging woman doctor who has used her experience of being a patient with terminal cancer to launch a campaign that has made life better for thousands of patients worldwide. Watch the video of Kate telling her own story.  You can see the impact of the #hellomynameis campaign at http://hellomynameis.org.uk/  and Kate in operation at @GrangerKate.

I met Cristina Vasilica when she was a student at the University of Salford where she is now a lecturer and PhD student in the College of Health and Social Care. She is still in my networks, and so I have seen the good work she does at the Greater Manchester Kidney Information Network (http://gmkin.org.uk/ ) at Facebook as part of her PhD. As it’s a closed group I can’t link to it but if you are from Greater Manchester and could contribute/ benefit, please contact them via the web site or at @gmkin on Twitter.  You can find out more about her PhD work here – she is doing practical good and contributing to knowledge.

I came across Lou Mycroft on an online course last year, and she has introduced me to an area and philosophy of education that I knew little of before – social purpose education.  Lou works as a teacher educator at Northern College but it isn’t just her student teachers who can learn with and from her – you can too.  She is generous in sharing and the TeachNorthern web site is stuffed with goodies and is a jumping off point for even more. Visit the site, follow her on Twitter at @lounorthern

It’s no coincidence that all three of these women are great learners and teachers.